RE: XML and SOAP constraints? (was RE: WSA constraints)

> 
> I certainly think that we must support other 'on the wire' formats and
> non-SOAP messages, just as WSDL supports their binding. 

I personally agree ... just looking for suggested wording to keep this from
becoming open-ended.  Also, what do you mean by "supported?"  Does that mean
"shall not preclude" or does it mean "we'll produce (or suggest the
production of) a normative non-XML binding"?

> 
> So, a constraint I would propose is : Described by  a WSDL document.

Hmm, how about "Described by a WSDL document or another formal semantic at
least as rich as WSDL."  Or, given the WS Description group's charter's
mention of RDF, is this implied by "WSDL"?  

[I raise this in order to keep the lid ON that can of worms, not top open it
up!!!] 

Also, for my information, is WSDL defined in terms of XML syntax, or the
Infoset?